The public consultation was intended to explore options to reduce the use of plastic bags and options to improve the requirements of biodegradability under EU law.
Over 15,500 responses were gathered by the Commission with just over 15,000 replies from EU citizens.
The results of the consultation show that over 70% of respondents agree that a ban on plastic bags across the EU is needed with only 12% agreeing that current requirements on compostability and biodegradability in the Packaging Directive were appropriate.
Chris Carroll of Seas At Risk said: “Plastic bags are a menace to the marine environment and this consultation has shown that European citizens have had enough of them. The Commission must listen to this resounding support for a ban and implement one across Europe as soon as possible. The Commission must also now look at how to reduce the use of other single use and disposable products and packaging that often end up as waste in the marine environment.”
Stephane Arditi of the European Environment Bureau said: “With more than two thirds of respondents supporting a ban of single use plastic bags, a clear signal is being sent to European institutions: it’s time for longer lasting products and for effective legal instruments supporting waste prevention.“
The recently awarded documentary “Toxic Europe” is a good piece of investigative journalism which uncovers a lot of dirty truths about waste management in Europe.
The documentary reveals how at least 225 million tons in the whole of the European Union escape legal treatment –it could be a lot more- and how that is linked to the low prices offered by the illegal dealers which sometimes is 4 to 5 times cheaper than the legal prices.
Indeed, the trafficking of waste traficking to internal EU borders or abroad faces lots of challenges; firstly, contrary to normal crimes, there is no interest from the parties to denounce the illegal practices because they all benefit from it. Secondly the waste flows mixed within the trade routs is so big that it is almost impossible to control. According to the documentary the customs of Antwerp, one of the biggest EU harbours, control only 2% of the waste that comes in and 1% of the waste that goes out (!).
It is badly needed that the EU takes over the control of its own borders if it is to manage illegal waste trade but once again the EU lacks the resources to do so and the member-states refuse to do so. Without more control at the borders –whose workers are very often are infiltrated by the mafia- the only way to stop waste from Germany, Denmark, Belgium, Italy, etc from being shipped abroad is by managing it locally with transparent and traceable systems. And this can only be done if we change our relation with our waste; if we separate it at source and it is properly collected and measured it is very difficult that it can later “disappear”.
So we can see how Zero Waste is not about only about sustainability it is also about democracy and rule of law. A Zero Waste strategy makes all waste very visible which makes traceability possible and effectively fights ilegal practices. Whenever waste is not separately collected or the authorities claim that they make waste “disappear” what it means is that it will end up either in an incinerator/landfill or scaping the legal routes..
How much waste do you generate in one month? Pål Mårtensson is a Zero Waster from Sweden, where he runs the famous Kretsloppsarken reuse and recycle park, who decided to check by himself how much waste does his household of four generate.
During one month Pål separated, measured and weighed the different waste fractions and the result has been amazing in many ways: “It was very easy, didn´t smell (careful cleaning) and you got a very good view of your waste when you look att it almost every day and that you take care, handle it not as waste but as resources. Out of almost 60 kg “waste”, there were only 0,9 kg I couldn´t handle in a satisfied way (probably goes to burning or bury). I´m very happy that so little is left for the burners, there will be a lack of waste for them if everyone made my example as a habit.” says Pål.
Want to check the detail?
Item dec 5-12-2011 – 3-1-2012
Paper (kg) 4,3 Recycle
Plastic (kg) 5,3 Recycle
Glas (kg/pcs) 7,9 23 Recycle
Pet (pcs) 1,3 22 Deposit
Cans (pcs) 0,8 7 Deposit
Metall (kg/pcs) 1,4 23 Recycle
Food -mostly peels, cores, coffee/tea grounds, bones, flowers…- (kg) 20,5 Compost
Commercials(kg) 3,6 paper Recycle
Newspaper(kg) 2,1 Recycle
Magazines(kg) 0,3 Recycle
Old tea(lit.) 5,9 Drain
Old coffee (lit) 2,1 Drain
Bulb (pcs) 0,1 1 Recycled
Textile (kg) 1,4 Reuse
Envelopes (kg) 0,2 Recycle/Burning
Electronic (kg) 1,2 Recycle
Rest/leftover(kg) 0,9
Burning/Bury(0,9kg rest/leftover) (candles, dishcloth, strings, tampongs,glossy paper)
59,3 kg “waste” total in one month
Therefore for a household of 4 pers and a period of one month including Christmas and New Year Pål’s family has generated 60kg. 15kg per person in average where the part that could not be composted, reused or recycled was only of 1,6%!!
Of course, the experience mentioned above is not representative (besides being only one example, Pål’s family generates 180kg per person/per year when the Swedish average is 480kg) but it does show the possibilities to live in a more sustainable way and how if all Swedes would follow Pål’s example could afford to close down all incinerators and radically increase recycling and composting.
There are Zero Waste experiences around Europe that confirm that what Pål has done can be repeated and it shows that, after all, it is up to us to make Zero Waste possible!
Food waste is many times a waste; it is a waste of resources and money, it is a waste that creates methane if landfilled and CO2 if incinerated, it is a waste when in the world one child is dying of hunger every 5 seconds … The current food wastage in Europe does highlight the contradictions of the world we live in but it also underlines the need for a Zero Waste policy, not only in the food sector but also in other sectors.
Indeed, the current economic crisis is keeping 23 million Europeans out of the job market whereas 60% of all municipal waste in the EU is landfilled or incinerated. The employment opportunities in the design, production, repairing, reusing, collection, recycling and composting sector are very substantial if only we change the waste market in order to divert waste from incinerators and landfills.
But these are very convenient dates to tackle food waste because of the holiday season that involves lots of investment in food and a good deal of cooking at home. According to WRAP every British family is wasting 60 euros a month in food that will not be eaten.
It is because of this wastage that the EU and some member states are taking measures to try to reduce this waste.
The European Commission is also addressing consumers on the issue of food waste in a recently launched campaign on resource efficiency called ‘generation awake’ . It gives tips on making the right choices when we buy and consume – including foodstuffs.
To sum up, waste prevention is paramount and it makes lots of sense that the EU is gearing up in this issue especially in the current days of growing resources scarcity. However, let’s not forget that these days most food discards in Europe still end up landfilled or incinerated causing lots of harmful emissions. Moreover, to this date the EU doesn’t require the separate collection of organics which means that the use of food scraps as soil improver after compost is not yet happening at considerable scale. Let’s not forget that organic waste is the biggest waste stream -30 to 50%- and as such it continues to be the pending issue in EU waste legislation.
In many cases those who argue against reusing electric and electronic goods are the same companies that produce them and therefore have an interest in you buying a new a new one. But some other times it is true that some people just don’t want a second hand electronic appliance. What is for sure is that today there are plenty of electric and electronic goods which are discarded despite being still fully operative or easily reusable if fixed.
New data from recent studies on reuse in the EU indicate that:
However in October 2011 the Environment Committee in the European Parliament voted in favour of a 5% target for reuse in the collection targets, a requirement for producers to provide information free of charge about preparation for reuse and treatment of the appliances they out in the market, requiring all collection schemes to provide for the separation of reusable WEEE at collection points and the adoption of European standards for preparation for reuse (to be created in max 3 years).
This positive outcome still needs to be approved by the EU member states before it can enter into force. So far the member state have been very reluctant to these measures and if no agreement is reached during this month of December the negotiations will have to go to conciliation which would downsize the ambition of the targets.
Given the increasing prices of raw materials, the employment opportunities linked to the reuse sector and the high energy embodied in these products it is necessary to improve collection and reuse rates of goods to get closer to a Zero Waste economy.
Few years ago paper and cardboard recycling was regarded as a big step in closing the loop of materials, yet what back then was a big improvement now it has the potential of going further. Paper recycling is a no-brainer now but there are new alternatives that are a lot more enviromentally friendly.
Therefore it would be necessary to work out a system that minimises water and chemicals use and emissions. And this is what the company Gaiakraft has done.
Gaiakraft has developped a system that should leave trees alone for a while and save good deal of water, emissions and chemicals. GaiaKraft bags and packaging is made from paper that comes from mineral powder (calcium carbonate) meaning it is tree-free! This tree-free paper differs from traditional paper in that it is made from a high percentage of mineral powder and a small percentage of non-toxic resin. What’s more is that the process used to make the paper uses no water or bleach like traditional wood pulp paper.
GaiaKraft is water-resistant and being a tree-free paper and essentially fibreless, it does not absorb ink and therefore prints with 20-30% less ink as compared to traditional wood-pulp paper.
GaiaKraft is degradable and due to its high mineral content safely degrades when left out in nature over a period of 6 to 9 months.
Less deforestation, no water or bleach use, no toxins released, degradable, recyclable, less emissions, water resistant, uses less ink… Gaiakraft paper looks like a step forward for the future of our forests and rivers but also for the implementation of Zero Waste strategies!
Primary school students of Capannori, Italy, set up the Museum of Bad Industrial Design (Piccolo Museo degli orroridi progettazione). A museum of packaging and products that cannot be reused, repaired, recycled or composted and hence have to end up in the dump.
This experience allowed the students to observe their everyday life and pick those things that were not sustainable. The experience was enlightening for the students but also for the grown-ups; how can we allow products to enter the market when even children can see that they are designed for the dump?
In order to enlighten the industrial designers of the big wealthy companies producing these goods the pupils wrote letters to them asking to please think about the future and produce products that could be recycled or composted at the end of their lives. As with the case of the coffee-capsules some of them replied with thank you notes and confirming their commitment to improve the design in the future.
Here is a good experience to involve children in waste prevention. The less non-reusable/repairable/recyclable stuff in the market the closer we are to Zero Waste!
Look at your home waste and you will see that it is mostly packaging. Once you have removed the food waste and paper what is left is mostly single use plastic bottles, cans, trays… Therefore, if you minimise the packaging in your shopping you will be generating less waste. Easy, uh?
Unpackaged is one of these shops in Europe that allow you to shop without having to bring home a bunch of single-use recipients and plastic bags that only harm the planet and fatten our bins. Unpackaged was founded in 2006 by Catherine Conway in the belief that there is a better way to sell products, so that customers can do the right thing – for themselves and for the environment.
Catherine set up Unpackaged because she wanted to refill her groceries using her own containers. The dream was to set up a beautiful shop that made it really easy for customers to come & refill all their daily essentials.
The website of Unpackaged explains very well why whilst some packaging is necessary in our modern industrialised food chain, unnecessary packaging is a waste because of:
Cost: It increases the price of the goods you buy. You are charged twice – first when you buy over packaged products and then through council tax for disposing of your rubbish.
Waste: It wastes resources at every level: production, storage, transport and disposal.
Pollution: Landfill and incineration are the two main ways of dealing with packaging waste. These are major pollutants for people and the environment as they release toxics and greenhouse gases.
What about recycling? While some packaging is recycled, most ends up in landfill sites and incinerators and some packaging is difficult and impossible to recycle. Recycling is certainly part of the solution, but it will only work if we use less packaging and adopt more ‘reusable’ ways of doing things – Unpackaged is based on this ethos.
This is why the mantra of unpackaged is:
Reduce by only buying what you need
Reuse by bringing your containers for a refill
Recycle what you can’t reuse
And… if you can’t reuse or recycle it then don’t buy it!
There is a growing trend in Europe but also around the world to minimise packaging. After all, when people go shopping they want to buy food, drinks, etc, they don’t want to buy packaging!
In a sensible world the producers should be interested in getting back the packaging so that they don’t lose the materials and this way they can use them again and again. This is not only how our sensible grandparents used to do it, it is also the basis of a how a deposit refilling system works or how Extended Producer Responsibility is being to be implemented in British Columbia in Canada.
Implementing Zero Waste strategies it is not only sensible and fun, it also attracts interest from the media. See these press highlights for Unpackaged:
Two lovely videos from CNN & Reuters which show off Unpackaged.
Features in many different types of publications from national newspapers to industry, design & consumer magazines – The Grocer, Which Magazine, The Independent, Style Will Save Us
Time Out recently voted Unpackaged the #48th best shop in London
Catherine was voted #32 in the Observer Food Monthly Top 40 Eco Heroes.
Unpackaged was included in Time Out’s ‘Little Black Book’ of the 500 most essential services in London
Organised by Zero Waste Lazio with the support of the Italian Zero Waste Network
Last weekend the Piazza Apostoli in Rome was filled with more than 3000 people who were asking for a Zero Waste alternative to the “Polverini local plan” which instead of reducing, reusing, composting and recycle wants to dispose of most of it.
The alternative plan proposed by the citizens puts separate collection at the center of the policy; recycling and composting what cannot be prevented or reduced and instead of resorting to mega landfills and incinerators for the remaining waste (10 to 12% of the total) it proposes that this waste should be studied and submitted to cold-treatment prior being biologically stabilized and stored in a landfill.
The Zero Waste demonstration asked not to replace the now closing dump of Malagrotta with a new mega landfill elsewhere in the Lazio province. Instead it is requested that the municipality of Rome, which represents 5/6 of the total municipal waste generated in the Lazio region, should implement door-to-door separate collection integrated with a system of reuse, repair and recycling centers.
The Italian Zero Waste Network is asking for the immediate replacement of the people responsible for this mismanagement and the return of a democratic logic that should bring back the power to the local communities and institutions.
The Italian Zero Waste network will be back to Rome on December 3rd to move forward with the local Zero Waste organisation to continue pushing for these goals. In this occasion there will be participation from people from international Zero Waste speaker, Paul Connett.
On behalf of the Italian Zero Waste network
Rossano Ercolini
When something has a negative value there is no incentive to deal with it. It is then left in the environment and we all suffer the consequences. Partly, a Zero Waste strategy consists in creating markets so that the products find a use at the end of their life.
Littering happens when food or beverage containers have a zero or negative value at the end of its use. Hence, the best way to avoid littering is to give waste a value. An empty can or bottle can end up in the bin, in the streets or recycled depending on whether the item has a value or not. Experience in Germany, Sweden, Norway, Denmark or the Netherlands shows that when the empty packaging is given some value (a deposit of 5 to 25 eurocents) the packaging will be recycled in more than 90% of the cases. Experience in countries without a deposit system shows that recycling happens in less than 50% of the cases. In those cases the waste ends up as liter or in a landfill or incinerator.
Retorna.org is the campaign in Spain to reintroduce a deposit system for beverages. This campaign takes place under the umbrella of the Zero Waste strategy in the country and wants to replace the current system in which the recycling of beverage packaging falls under 40% -due to the lack of incentives for people to do the right thing- to a deposit system that would allow to duplicate the recycling rates -which would reduce emissions-, increase the purity -and hence recyclability- of the materials, create more green jobs, radically reduce littering, reduce costs for municipalities and consumers and enforce the polluter pays principle. This alternative system -which was in use in Spain until the 1980s- and which obtains better results in any European country that has implemented it, it is being fiercely opposed by the industry. It is interesting to observe how the arguments used by the industry today in Spain are the same sort of arguments that were raised also by the industry in countries such as Germany before implementation. These fears proved to be exagrated and the system has been very satisfactory allowing the industry to get back the materials.
In a Zero Waste economy we should deal with any waste that has a negative value and redesign it so that we create positive incentive or change the way we perceive it so that its value starts being positive. For instance, the company Terra Cyle started paying to garbage pickers in Rio de Janeiro, Brasil, to collect chip bags -a priory non-recyclable-, suddenly chip bags disappeared from the landscape and chip bags automatically stopped being waste.
Zero Waste is about making waste visible so that we can identify the problem in the design or in the system. Giving waste a positive value so that it can generate markets is a way to reduce the amount of waste going to landfill or incineration.
The path that started 4 years ago by Capannori, when mirroring itself with San Francisco decided to declare the Zero Waste goal for 2020, is now followed by 56 municipalities (the objective for the Zero Waste Italy network of municipalities is to reach 100 ZW municipalities for 2012) . What started as a grass-root movement that no political party wanted to support is gaining political momentum across the political spectrum. The last incorporation to the ZW network was the city of Naples, the vice-mayor of which attended the gathering and declared the commitment of the recently elected city-council to turn around the bad image of Naples. Indeed, the change has come to Naples where for the moment 165.000hab are being the first ones to experience the door-to-door separate collection system with encouraging results of 66% separate collection. The plan is to slowly expand the new system around Naples and show the world that if ZW is possible in Naples it should be possible anywhere.
The meeting included impressive presentations from the city of San Francisco but also succesful experiences from Sweden, Wales, Catalonia and the Basque Country, Spain. The town of Hernani in the Basque Country after only 2 years of implementation of the door-to-door collection system saw the recycling levels more than double and now stands at 80% showing the Zero Waste path in the Gipuzkoa region.
During the meeting the documentary “Zero Waste” from Victor Ibañez was screened for the first time and the plan is to screen broadly around Italy. Below you can see the trailer.
During the second day the meeting of the Zero Waste Research Centre focused on the topic of bad-design; following the composition analysis of the fraction that could not be recycled and has to be sent for disposal. The participants discussed with the experts possible alternatives to take out of the residual waste (the waste that cannot be recycled) nappies, shoes, coffee-capsules and some plastics.
Thanks to the Zero Waste strategy Capannori has been the cradle to successful experiences that are now being replicated elsewhere; packaging-free shops such as Effecorta (which is now opening in other places in Italy), reusable nappies companies such as Ecobimbi, reuse and repair centres such as the ASCIT center inaugurated this last weekend by the mayor of Capannori and the vice-mayor of Naples. The last initiative is the re-shuffling of the shoe-making industry, one of its most traditional ones, with the design of long-lasting, toxic-free shoes with biodegradable soles. The parts of these shoes can easily be separated in order to increase the recycling potential. The goal is to keep and increase local jobs with good salaries.
All in all, a very inspiring meeting that continued to increase the commitment, the motivation and reach-out of the Zero Waste thinking in Europe!
On September 9th, representatives from UK central government, local authorities and universities gathered together in Coventry along with social enterprises, multinationals, waste management companies, the third sector and environmental bodies, to explore how UK society can create a proper zero waste economy in line with aspirations for 2020.
For many, zero waste translates as ‘zero waste to landfill’, but a strong message that was made clear at today’s conference was that a zero waste goal should be exactly what it says…simply ZERO waste, achieved through innovations that design out waste during manufacture and a society that promotes reuse and technologies that enable precious resources to be properly recycled rather than the assumption that the simplest destination for residual waste is to be burned with no other opportunity for recovery.
Anyone who has any doubts over whether this zero waste vision could become a reality, should consult with American waste campaigner Professor Paul Connett, pictured above, who presents a strong case for product redesign, economic incentives, community empowerment and the development of separation & research facilities at landfill\incineration sites, as being vital components in making it work.
And the key to success is everyone in the chain working together to drive the results forward. Coventry University, which already runs 50 courses in sustainability and the environment, revealed plans to create a Zero Waste research centre, working closely with the local authority.
Today’s programme also presented examples of industry’s approach to creating zero waste through manufacturing processes and facilities management as well as examplers of community-based programmes and waste stream development.
The presentation by Garden Organic’s Myles Bremner particularly struck a chord, as it was one of the strongest case studies for how individuals can make a difference, not only regarding reducing their own waste, but by empowering their communities. Through the Master Composter scheme, Garden Organics has been successful in creating a peer-to-peer network, where members of the public are able to help others, by sharing their expertise locally.
Although this event was organised independently of National Zero Waste Week, it was a welcome coincidence and well-timed for this week’s calendar. It would have been news to most of those who attended today’s conference that this week is indeed the 4th national awareness week of its kind.
The Rt Hon Caroline Spelman MP, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs attended the event and stayed for a short while following her keynote speech. Although the government is placing waste prevention high on its agenda and has created a path towards a zero waste economy, the conference demonstrated that it needs to work harder and be tougher on manufacturing to design out waste and solutions for maximising the waste that remains.
Mal Williams, CEO of the Welsh community recycling network Clych, who also spoke at today’s conference, really couldn’t have put the point more bluntly.
“Waste is a mistake, not a resource,” he asserted and referring to how society goes forward, he added that it is time to move from a “Careless system to a CAREFUL system”.
And I have to agree, this should be the barometer against which a sustainable zero waste strategy should be measured and judged.
Many cities have built Mechanical Biological Treatment Facilities (MBT) during the last decade with the aim of reducing the waste to be finally dumped or burnt. The results depend on every case but it is clear that MBT alone is not the sollution for anything. However it can play a role in transitional strategies to reduce residual waste without having to depend on more expensive undesirable options such as incineration. A well-designed ideal Zero Waste strategy shouldn’t need MBT.
What are MBTs?
MBT covers a wide range of activities and technologies to deal with residual waste –i.e. waste that hasn’t been separated for recycling or composting-. As the name explains it is composed of a mechanical part -in which waste is mechanically separated to recover recyclables- and a biological part –to either compost or digest the organic fraction-.
There are three main outputs from an MBT plant are; recyclables –such as PET plastic that can be sent for recycling-, low quality soil –the biologically stabilised part is used for land reclamation, almost never for agriculture- and RDF, Refuse Derived Fuel, which is a mix of materials with a homogeneus calorific value to burn in incinerators or in some cement kilns.
MBT became popular with the entry into force of the Landfill Directive which obliged member states to reduce the biodegradable waste going to landfill. MBT has the capacity to reduce the volume and methane emissions from waste, plus since it is modular it allows some flexibility and is cheaper and faster to build than any other big scale centralised options.
The draw-backs of MBT are that the bad quality of the compost they produce; almost always too polluted to be applied as soil improver. As a consequence, some authorities see MBT as a way to meet recycling rates without actually recycling and the production of RDF aimed at being burnt in incinerators and cement kilns.
MBT in Europe
MBT have been used with different success in Europe. For instance, in Germany they have been in use for more than 10 years and albeit having obtained some good results, the bigger the plant the more malodours and bacteria for the neighbourhood. The experience has been proven that MBT is not necessary when biowaste collection works well and there is high quality separate collection of other waste-streams combined with a good product policy promoting prevention of chlorine/PVC, heavy metals and flame retardants.
In Barcelona, Spain, MBT facilities were called ecoparcs and have been in operation since 10 years. Although they have managed to considerably reduce the amount of waste sent to landfills and are recovering materials for recycling it is a fact that no good compost has come out of these facilities whilst their production of RDF has increased. In fact, after all the expensive investments in MBT the city of Barcelona ended up implementing separate collection of organics (2010) after realising that the only way to get good compost is with input coming from biowaste source separation.
MBT and Zero Waste
A Zero Waste strategy means that waste should be prevented and source separation should be maximised. If all the products in the market would be recyclable and properly separately collected there will be no waste and hence no need for MBT. If MBT has a place in a Zero Waste strategy is only when dealing with the current 20-30% of total municipal solid waste that can’t be source separated and collected. In these cases MBT can be a temporary solution but always keeping in mind the goal of continuing minimising the residual waste.
In fact, the real name for MBT in a Zero Waste strategy would be a combination of a Material Recovery Center together with a Zero Waste Research Center. In these facilties the recoverable materials are recovered and the few residuals left are stabilised so that they can be safely landfilled after they go through the Zero Waste Research Center which analyses the defects in design in order to work upstream to make them recyclable in the future.
One of the pillars of Zero Waste is source separation of organics –the only way to obtain clean high-quality compost- and experience proves that this can’t be replaced by MBT.
More and more European municipalities are adopting the Zero Waste goal. This is why a meeting will be held in the craddle of Zero Waste in Italy, Capannori, to organise the coordination -national and international- of the Zero Waste Communities.
Finally there will be a meeting of the Zero Waste Research Center, which was established in Capannori a year ago, in which innovative ideas to change product design (such as coffee capsules, shoes, packaging, diapers…) will be discussed.
The roadmap has a strong push towards “residual waste close to zero” -although there is no definition of residual waste at EU level- and it underlines that “incineration with energy recovery should be limited to non recyclable materials, landfilling is virtually eliminated and high recycling is ensured”. A portion of the text reads:
“Milestone: By 2020, waste is managed as a resource. Waste generated per capita is in absolute decline. Recycling and re-use of waste are economically attractive options for public and private actors due to widespread separate collection and the development of functional markets for secondary raw materials. More materials, including materials having a significant impact on the environment and critical raw materials, are recycled. Waste legislation is fully implemented. Illegal shipments of waste have been eradicated. Energy recovery is limited to non recyclable materials, landfilling is virtually eliminated and high quality recycling is ensured. The Commission will: … • Review existing prevention, re-use, recycling, recovery and landfill diversion targets to move towards an economy based on re-use and recycling, with residual waste close to zero (in 2014); • Ensure that public funding from the EU budget gives priority to activities higher up the waste hierarchy as defined in the Waste Framework Directive (e.g. priority to recycling plants over waste disposal) (in 2012/2013);”
As explained in a previous post recycling is not enough and we need to move towards a Zero Waste economy, i.e. we have to reduce our resource use whilst making sure everything produced is recyclable and recycled. The EU is now starting to do the shift from being a Recycling Society to a Zero Waste Society. However, right now the Resource Efficiency Roadmap are just a pile of inspiring statements and visions, that need to be put into action. In order to do so lots of policy changes -such as increasing recycling targets or mandating separate collection of organics- will have to take place and it is then when we’ll see how serious we are about a Zero Waste future.
Zero Waste is one of the pillars of sustainability. It is impossible to be sustainable as long as what we discard cannot be the resource of another process without endangering health or the environment. This is why Zero Waste concept is good for both people –less pollution- and the business sector –less innefficiency and costs-.
The book “New Standards for Long Term Business Survival” from J. Scott explains why waste doesn’t make any sense from a business perspective. Using several examples and reviewing the recent history of the relation between companies and waste, Scott explains how the business world has changed and is continuing to change in the direction of Zero Waste.
It explains the great work of Walter Stahel regarding the “closed-loop economy” and the two ways to achieve it; either by reusing, repairing or remanufacturing products and their materials, which facilitates job creation and decreases virgin material usage (by re-using molecules) or by optimizing the profitability of products by converting them into a service so as to keep the product’s materials in the hands of the manufacturer in order to lower raw material and production costs. Safechem, Michelin or Interface are succesful example of this second option of selling a service instead of a commodity (selling square meters of cleaning, the distance a tire can travel or the meters of carpet-covered floors).
This book and other from J.Scott can be downloaded for free from our ZW library.
From this book we extract 6 Key Teaching and Learning Points
1- Waste elimination and resource maximization are two sides of the same coin. One cannot occur without the other.
2- Waste elimination is an on-going process. There is no finish line.
3- Waste creation does not equate with freedom nor is it a basic human right: the world is interconnected and has limited resources –and waste impedes the well-being and security of others.
4- Waste is a financial burden to businesses, customers, and local, national and international communities.
5- Spending money on lawyers and lobbyists to fight against higher efficiency standards or for the right to create waste is counterproductive, self-defeating, costly and pointless.
6- Taxing waste has the capacity to serve two purposes: (1) the money collected can fund and support infrastructure building, and, (2) businesses and industries would be encouraged to be less wasteful.
How to make getting rid of what we don’t need a fun experience? In Gothenburg, Sweden, they have designed a reuse and recycle park to look as an amusement park.
Results: they attract 300 to 400 visitors a day, sell for a value of 1,1 million euros, create 25 green jobs whilst radically reducing the amount of waste that otherwise would have to be disposed of. This is a good piece of Zero Waste!
Kretsloppsarken (the name of this amusement park) is a perfect example of how to succesfully move up the waste hierachy; it educates people so that they can prevent waste from being generated (prevention), it reduces waste by giving a second life to the products (reuse) and it recycles what cannot be reused (recycle).
People can bring any item they don’t need to the Kretsloppsarken; furniture, clothes, household stuff, white goods, construction materials, old bycicles (from every three old bikes a new one will come out from the repairshop), wood, etc… all gets repaired, reused or recycled and put in the market again.
When they were designing the new recycling park the city council thought of creating instead an amusement park for recyclers and reusers. The Kretsloppsarken philosophy is that donating, buying second hand and sorting one’s waste should be easy and almost a pleasure.
How to make it a pleasure? By showing the facilities always tidy and clean, with white clean containers where to drop the recyclables.
How to make it entertaining? By using a dog to sort out 6 differet waste streams, by having clowns taking care of educating children into recycling and reuse, by organising concerts and organic happenings…
How to make it educative? By making available a “personal sorter” to guide the person through the sorting process and asking the right questions so that waste finds its best purpose…
Kretsloppsarken was built in one year time reusing 80% of an old building and it was inaugurated in May 2007 with a cost of 4 million euros. The initiative was of the city of Gothenburg but the reusing and recycling of the collected stuff is one by 5 private enterpreneurs.
The succesful results in terms of economic turnout, green job creation and waste minimisation confirm this as the right approach.
Even visiting the bathroom can be a fun experience in Kretsloppsarken! Decorated with paintings and pictures for sale very often visitors come out of the toilette with a new acquisition to decorate their homes. There is no such a thing as a boring place in Kretsloppsarken.
The contribution of recycling-amusement parks to Zero Waste is paramount. They are not only cheaper, more effective and job-creating than incinerators or landfills, they are also a lot more beautiful and fun. The struggle for sustainability is less of a strain when it can be made fun!
We were surprised to see how Zero Waste plans are being approved all over the board in the state of California. With active campaigns to ban styrofoam and plastic bags, innovative prevention measures and committed companies complementing local administration. This year a special award went to Captain Charles Moore for his work on the mapping and studying the plastic debris polluting the oceans. We had the chance to board his boat and accompany him to take water samples in the Tijuana bay. The worrying state of water pollution in the Pacific Ocean –with a plastic soup as big as Europe- and how that is affecting sealife. The pollution and depletion of fishstocks is behind the most progressive decisions in California to stop waste from polluting the seas.
We all use or have used nappies in a time of our life. Nappies are a fairly recent invention that has eased the workload to many generations of parents –specially mothers-. Consequently, nappies are here to stay. The question is how to make its production, transport, use, re-use and disposal sustainable? What kind of nappies are suitable for a society that aims to phase out waste?
Why are single-use disposable nappies a problem?
Ca 4000 to 5000 nappies are used per child until its 3rd year of age, which equals 1tn of waste per child. Seniors also use nappies and hence generate vast amounts of highly putrescible waste. In fact, even though nappies represent only between 1 and 2% of total municipal solid waste, in the places with highest separate collection rates they represent almost the biggest fraction left in the residual waste. For instance, in Capannori , the first Zero Waste municipality in Italy , nappies represent almost 15% of the waste fraction that can’t be recycled or composted. With the increase in diversion of other waste streams and increase in the age of the Europeans that will need nappies we shall see an increase both in percentage and weight in the next years in Europe.
The problem with nappies is its high fermentability combined with the composition of the nappy –combination of plastic, cotton, creams and faeces-. This means that, firstly, disposal of the nappy in the waste bin (as mixed waste) and, secondly, forces a very frequent collection of the garbage bag -because of smells and other hazards caused by its putrescibility-.
If we could solve the problem of nappies in the waste bin it would be possible to reduce the frequency of collection which would reduce the collection and disposal costs. Moreover less nappies in landfills means less methane in the atmosphere and less impact to human health.
How to get nappies out of the waste bin?
The best way is to avoid using disposable nappies by expanding the use of reusable nappies. If we want to keep on using single-use nappies another way is to find a way to seal them so that they don’t smell and therefore can endure more time in bin. However this doesn’t solve the disposal and sustainability problems. Another solution is to facilitate special bins/collection days for nappies so that they don’t contaminate the other waste in the bin and hence reduce the frequency of waste collection. This is done in most door-to-door collection systems.
Lastly, another option if we were to continue using the single-use disposable nappies would be to produce nappies with compostable bio-plastic. This does seem a solution at first hand for our busy societies. However, studies have shown high levels of zinc present in the compost, which originate from hand-creams and other additives used to avoid nappy rash. Toxins in compost speak against the option of compostable nappies.
The advantages of reusable nappies
Reusable cloth nappies have many advantages:
- they save money for the user (from 1000€ to 2000€ per baby) and to the community (less putrescible waste = possibility to reduce the frequency of collection = lower collection costs and odours). Moreover, these nappies can be re-used when the baby has grown up, meaning that they could be sold, passed on to the next child or friends/relatives!
It is also important to note that single-use nappies externalise the costs of collection and treatment to the public administration and hence to the consumer. In other words, the price of single-use nappies in the supermarket doesn’t include the costs for the society and the environment once the product leaves the shop. In the end we all end up paying for it when the company, following the polluter pays principle, should be the one shouldering these costs. If these costs would be internalised in the price the economic advantage for reusable nappies would be even bigger.
It is estimated that in Europe 20% of the population uses reusable nappies -15% for economy and 5% because of environmental reasons-. The use is uneven between EU countries, some with high percentages and some with very low. What is clear is that this is a growing trend and we are going to see more of these if we are to advance towards sustainability. From the waste point of view, replacing single-use nappies with reusable nappies is the way to go if we want to reach a Zero Waste society.
Over 70% of respondents to a European Commission public consultation have voted in favour of a ban on the distribution of plastic bags. Green groups such as Seas at Risk and EEB say the Commission should now act on this overwhelming support and implement a ban across Europe.
The recently awarded documentary 
On September 9th, representatives from UK central government, local authorities and universities gathered together in Coventry along with social enterprises, multinationals, waste management companies, the third sector and environmental bodies, to explore how UK society can create a proper zero waste economy in line with aspirations for 2020.
